I'm surprised you thought the bounce cards were there for my deck's creatures

I haven't actually looked at your deck list, so it was more of a general question. But I gather now that your primary strategy is card advantage and forcing an empty hand very quickly. Bounce for one or even two mana is better than burn that costs more for bigger creatures. Still, for smaller creatures it would seem burn (shock, dead weight) is better than bounce because your follow-up discard means more, no?

Oh gotcha, sorry about that.

So, yes and no, it depends on the deck IMO. In mine, I'm filling their hand, and including Mind Rot and Monomania, which become dead cards unless I can keep some cards in my opponents hand. For other decks, that simply include some discard cards, I'd say maybe to probably. But, I don't think those decks work very well, so I don't know. Generally speaking, kill cards are better than bounce for creature control IMO, but not always.

By adding some early draw, I can reduce my need for mana fixing (+4 Think Twice). This also allowed for more consistent early games, and more guaranteed card draw than (-2) Graveborn Muse or (-2) Indulgent Tormentor could (-2 Armillary Sphere). I switched out (-4) Void Snare for Dead Weight. Although this makes the deck far more vulnerable to non-creature permanents, it makes it far less vulnerable to all of the 2/2 creatures (the worst for this deck was Goblin Rabblemaster, but they were all tough in their own ways). Finally, I had two open slots left (at the top of the curve) so I decided to use Rune-Scarred Demon, because Demon, Demon, Horror should win most games.

The deck seems much improved of the original. It's still the same concept, but just a bit better at doing what it was trying to do, which is make Monomania a killer card, destroy the opponent's hand, and win by forcing them to play my game.

Major Weakness GY decks. A Spikier version probably loses monomania (of course, sigh), and gains Sheoldred and a single Suffer the Past. Edit: maybe Shadowborn instead of Suffer, so you get that combo possible.

By adding some early draw, I can reduce my need for mana fixing (+4 Think Twice). This also allowed for more consistent early games, and more guaranteed card draw than (-2) Graveborn Muse or (-2) Indulgent Tormentor could (-2 Armillary Sphere). I switched out (-4) Void Snare for Dead Weight. Although this makes the deck far more vulnerable to non-creature permanents, it makes it far less vulnerable to all of the 2/2 creatures (the worst for this deck was Goblin Rabblemaster, but they were all tough in their own ways). Finally, I had two open slots left (at the top of the curve) so I decided to use Rune-Scarred Demon, because Demon, Demon, Horror should win most games.

The deck seems much improved of the original. It's still the same concept, but just a bit better at doing what it was trying to do, which is make Monomania a killer card, destroy the opponent's hand, and win by forcing them to play my game.

Major Weakness GY decks. A Spikier version probably loses monomania (of course, sigh), and gains Sheoldred and a single Suffer the Past. Edit: maybe Shadowborn instead of Suffer, so you get that combo possible.

Great job creating a competitive discard deck DJ. I have tested almost every other deck in this thread and this one is by far the best. I am sure that the slower meta on steam might have something to do with that, but this deck is consistent in having the opponent discard everything in their hand. It turns into them playing everything they draw and hoping you can't answer it which is exactly where this deck shines. Love it! It does have some tough matchups against SS, but that card is hard to beat with most decks.

I tried to squeeze in quicken for some instant discard fun, but the only card that I would want to cut down would be mind rot which takes away from the quicken addition. I couldn't see any way to make this deck better given the card pool we have.

That said, if anyone has a discard deck they think is as good I am open to testing it out for ya.

Hello everyone, this is my dimir deck. The reason for a few of the cards is 2 x mind rot is due to not wanting to see mind rot after an opponent has already dropped all the cards in their hand. With 1 x monomania and 2 x mind rot and 4 x liliana's specter I get plenty of discard without the risk of many dead draws later on. The rest of the deck is pretty standard dimir with some removal and counterspells and draw.

Yeah, you were right, and I was wrong. The issue is pretty straightforward had I thought about it at the time. I don't mind bouncing something big in order to make them discard it and another card - total cost either 4 or 5 mana to get rid of a big threat and one other card. If it's a big enough creature (or whatever) it is worth it. That same calculus totally fails if it's a 2/2 card - for example Goblin Rabblemaster. And at that point in the game, I wouldn't be able to force them to discard the problem card in any case. That change btw was dead on right, and it really improved the deck's consistency in a serious way. kudos.

I tried both versions of your discard deck DJ and TBH I liked the first version a lot better than the second one. The first version felt solid but this was not the case when I played the second version. Maybe I had bad luck or I am missing on something but I'll try to explain why.

Cards like Mind Rot (and Liliana's Specter but to a lesser extent) really run counter to what you are trying to do with Monomania. Since you don't have much board presence in the first turns besides Brain Maggot and Specters you are pretty much forced to play those cards early to start actually doing something in the first turns. In the first version you had a lot more removal/bounce spells which could help stalling the board and slow down your opponent until you can draw the big guns and actually start doing something.

Tribute to Hunger was great with all the bounce as you could force more easily the opponent to sacrifice the creature you want. The larger amount of bounce spells also made playing cards like Liliana's Specter less harmful to Monomania and you could actually start building a board state with it.

Although I managed to consistently empty my opponent's hand at some point, the main problems I had at every game were pretty much the same:

- Monomania often ending up as a dead card due to the above mentioned problems unless it is in my starting hand. If I have it in my starting hand I can at least plan in order to make it relevant. But then I still need to refrain from using some cards and sometimes lose tempo as a result.

- General difficulty in keeping up with my opponent's board state. Although bounce spells, Dead Weight and discard spells helped, at some point there was not much I could do against big creatures once my bounce spells are exhausted. And discard can't prevent the opponent topdecking some big wincon to pull the win when you think things are over. Talrand helped a lot in improving my board state when he sticked around but it's not always the case and with 2 in the deck you don't always see him.

- In the games I played Think Twice alone wasn't really enough to keep me afloat with cards. I think the deck needs another draw engine and probably bringing back the Muses could help.

- The 2 Rune-Scarred Demons and the 3 Dinrova Horrors weren't always sufficient to help closing the game. I think it would be better to have other late game threats, especially since you have few early creatures to start doing the job. Your idea of putting in Sheoldred for example could be the right call IMO since it can help offset the impact of topdeck removal on your big dudes in the late game and also bring back smaller creatures.

- The huge amount of taplands slowed the deck quite a lot IMO, which really didn't help. I can understand though why you would need many to cast the and spells but still in game it felt like a bit too much to me for a 2 color deck.

I tried both versions of your discard deck DJ and TBH I liked the first version a lot better than the second one. The first version felt solid but this was not the case when I played the second version. Maybe I had bad luck or I am missing on something but I'll try to explain why.

Cards like Mind Rot (and Liliana's Specter but to a lesser extent) really run counter to what you are trying to do with Monomania. Since you don't have much board presence in the first turns besides Brain Maggot and Specters you are pretty much forced to play those cards early to start actually doing something in the first turns. In the first version you had a lot more removal/bounce spells which could help stalling the board and slow down your opponent until you can draw the big guns and actually start doing something.

Tribute to Hunger was great with all the bounce as you could force more easily the opponent to sacrifice the creature you want. The larger amount of bounce spells also made playing cards like Liliana's Specter less harmful to Monomania and you could actually start building a board state with it.

Although I managed to consistently empty my opponent's hand at some point, the main problems I had at every game were pretty much the same:

- Monomania often ending up as a dead card due to the above mentioned problems unless it is in my starting hand. If I have it in my starting hand I can at least plan in order to make it relevant. But then I still need to refrain from using some cards and sometimes lose tempo as a result.

- General difficulty in keeping up with my opponent's board state. Although bounce spells, Dead Weight and discard spells helped by the time my opponent at some point there was not much I could do against big creatures once my bounce spells are exhausted. And discard can't prevent the opponent topdecking some big wincon to pull the win when you think things are over. Talrand helped a lot in improving my board state when he sticked around but it's not always the case and with 2 in the deck you don't always see him.

- In the games I played Think Twice alone wasn't really enough to keep me afloat with cards. I think the deck needs another draw engine and probably bringing back the Muses could help.

- The 2 Rune-Scarred Demons and the 3 Dinrova Horrors weren't always sufficient to help closing the game. I think it would be better to have other late game threats, especially since you have few early creatures to start doing the job. Your idea of putting in Sheoldred for example could be the right call IMO since it can help offset the impact of topdeck removal on your big dudes in the late game and also bring back smaller creatures.

- The huge amount of taplands slowed the deck quite a lot IMO, which really didn't help. I can understand though why you would need many to cast the and spells but still in game it felt like a bit too much to me for a 2 color deck.

Interesting. Well it's possible that the original was the better idea. The core functionality is bounce, mind rot, and specters, with brain maggot as extra pain. And both versions have those cards, so it may be a matter of personal taste.

In my current build I've dropped Monomania entirely. I am running Sheoldred and Shadowborn Demon instead. I agree that it's hard to land Monomania, and as such, I've decided to drop it, in my competitive (non-theory crafted) version of the deck.

I had also considered the possibility of running peel from reality for bounce as well. This may actually be the right thing to do in the original build - and in any version that keeps monomania.

All of that said, I am fairly certain that you are having bad luck if this build is performing worse than the original for you. This version (even keeping monomania) has been much more consistent for me.

(on the subject of tap lands, most people will say that I run too many in every deck that I make. I have no problem with people removing a few of them, the mana balance is usually based on what I would run with real duals - we don't have real duals, so consequently I'm not really considering the 'comes into play tapped' aspect - this is an effect of years of building paper decks, and basically never using tap lands the whole time. Adjust as you see fit if you test the decks.)

Let me give you some logic behind the tap lands, and the amount that I use (before you dismiss them as a bad idea entirely).

The amount of mana sources in each of my decks is based on math that expects a roughly 90% probability that I will get the colors I'm looking for on the turn I'd want to play the card. Similarly, the land counts in my decks are designed to fit the CMC curve I'm using very closely. I'm using math for the this analysis, and I expect that in the long run on the average the decks will perform better - this is not anything to do with card quality, but simply mana efficiency (I'm by no means suggesting that some silly Jank deck I post here, is somehow superior, I'm just describing the thought process).

Removing a tapland lowers the probability somewhat, and raises the likelihood that you don't get the mana you need until your 5th land (say for example for Talrand). That might be the next turn (which would be fine), or it might be a few turns later (which would be a disaster). edit: if it's not the next turn then you are actually better off even if the 4th land ETB tapped, because you still get it on turn 5. Of course, in most cases you can play your tapped lands in an appropriate order such as to minimize the trouble from them coming into play tapped.

FWIW, I stand by my land decisions, in this, and all of my decks. The only time I may wish to change them, is if an when a card is not actually getting played on the turn I plan to play it. Talrand is a reasonable example of this, as I may wish to have a 5th land untapped in order to save it from removal. I might consider removing on U source just for that logic alone, but I'm not sure, and I wouldn't make the decision lightly.

Interesting. Well it's possible that the original was the better idea. The core functionality is bounce, mind rot, and specters, with brain maggot as extra pain. And both versions have those cards, so it may be a matter of personal taste.

In my current build I've dropped Monomania entirely. I am running Sheoldred and Shadowborn Demon instead. I agree that it's hard to land Monomania, and as such, I've decided to drop it, in my competitive (non-theory crafted) version of the deck.

I had also considered the possibility of running peel from reality for bounce as well. This may actually be the right thing to do in the original build - and in any version that keeps monomania.

All of that said, I am fairly certain that you are having bad luck if this build is performing worse than the original for you. This version (even keeping monomania) has been much more consistent for me.

(on the subject of tap lands, most people will say that I run too many in every deck that I make. I have no problem with people removing a few of them, the mana balance is usually based on what I would run with real duals - we don't have real duals, so consequently I'm not really considering the 'comes into play tapped' aspect - this is an effect of years of building paper decks, and basically never using tap lands the whole time. Adjust as you see fit if you test the decks.)

Regarding the first version of your deck, I was actually referring to it before you swapped 3x Tribute to Hunger and Sheoldred for 4x Mind Rot. I didn't see you changed the first deck list, sorry for the oversight.

I'll give a few more tries to the deck with the Shadowborn Demon and Sheoldred in and probably adjust the manabase too for less taplands to see how it goes.

Well let me know. If the original build really performs better for you, I'll go back to it. It's actually quite different (from a strategic perspective), but I didn't really realize it until after I made the changes. Tribute (which was included before I decided what I really wanted to do), significantly changes the play style, because as you stated before you can bounce a weak card, and force them to sac a strong card. That's pretty strong for 4 mana.

I tried both versions of your discard deck DJ and TBH I liked the first version a lot better than the second one. The first version felt solid but this was not the case when I played the second version. Maybe I had bad luck or I am missing on something but I'll try to explain why.

Cards like Mind Rot (and Liliana's Specter but to a lesser extent) really run counter to what you are trying to do with Monomania. Since you don't have much board presence in the first turns besides Brain Maggot and Specters you are pretty much forced to play those cards early to start actually doing something in the first turns. In the first version you had a lot more removal/bounce spells which could help stalling the board and slow down your opponent until you can draw the big guns and actually start doing something.

Tribute to Hunger was great with all the bounce as you could force more easily the opponent to sacrifice the creature you want. The larger amount of bounce spells also made playing cards like Liliana's Specter less harmful to Monomania and you could actually start building a board state with it.

Although I managed to consistently empty my opponent's hand at some point, the main problems I had at every game were pretty much the same:

- Monomania often ending up as a dead card due to the above mentioned problems unless it is in my starting hand. If I have it in my starting hand I can at least plan in order to make it relevant. But then I still need to refrain from using some cards and sometimes lose tempo as a result.

- General difficulty in keeping up with my opponent's board state. Although bounce spells, Dead Weight and discard spells helped, at some point there was not much I could do against big creatures once my bounce spells are exhausted. And discard can't prevent the opponent topdecking some big wincon to pull the win when you think things are over. Talrand helped a lot in improving my board state when he sticked around but it's not always the case and with 2 in the deck you don't always see him.

- In the games I played Think Twice alone wasn't really enough to keep me afloat with cards. I think the deck needs another draw engine and probably bringing back the Muses could help.

- The 2 Rune-Scarred Demons and the 3 Dinrova Horrors weren't always sufficient to help closing the game. I think it would be better to have other late game threats, especially since you have few early creatures to start doing the job. Your idea of putting in Sheoldred for example could be the right call IMO since it can help offset the impact of topdeck removal on your big dudes in the late game and also bring back smaller creatures.

- The huge amount of taplands slowed the deck quite a lot IMO, which really didn't help. I can understand though why you would need many to cast the and spells but still in game it felt like a bit too much to me for a 2 color deck.

You know what, I think you're probably right. I'm going to revert tonight, and take it for a spin. OG version, no mind rot.

Edit: 3 games: three concedes. The original was pretty ace.

Last edited by DJ0045 on Fri May 01, 2015 1:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

I keep thinking he should be jamming in Tidehollow Strix and Pestermite into the list. Strix will help give options for curving, beats and trades. Pestermite will just be good tempo, beats and another target for EtB.

Granted that will be steering closer to his unearth deck theme but they were good there too (oh wait...isn't that the deck you love? )

-3 Tribute to Hunger-2 Rune Scared Demon (I see 2 "normal' fetch targets - Sheoldred, Shadowborn and then a handful of corner cases so I think the deck can survive without it and benefit from a lower curve)-4 Phrexian Rager (I'm gambling on Pestermite being the better draw normally)

+4 Tidehollow Strix+4 Pestermite+1 Suffer the Past (for the spider decks or the Kozy's, treasured finds etc. Also the 'self mill' decks are real atm or artifact recursion since you played the deck this week and everyone copies your stuff for the next week or so)

So I see you're all in on the 2/1 flyer plan.. 12 of them lol. I went down that road before too..

I put in about 5 games with the list and only lost to Spiders. Suffer the Past is only good in that particular matchup.. so it got cut (Hakeem and I were texting while testing at the same time). I feel it may be better.. to perform better in more matchups, and accept that you'll probably get rolled by spider decks.

Rune Scarred won me pretty much every match.. there's no way I'd cut him.. ever. One Rune Scarred is really 2 Rune Scarreds and Sheoldred.. bc I pull them that way almost every time. Dinrova was good too. Getting there to cast the bombs isn't hard with 10 draw cards.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum